Glenn Beck: Who was against Slaughter rule in 2005?



Glenn Beck's American Revival


Glenn Beck's American Revival is a daylong event where you can find information, inspiration, and the preparation to help turn this country around...


 - Tickets now available!

GLENN: I want to play Robert Gibbs and the audio that happened yesterday. Who is asking him this question yesterday, Pat?

PAT: One of the reporters on at MS I mean I think NBC.

GLENN: NBC reporter.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Asked Robert Gibbs about the Slaughter rule which will be the way they pass healthcare without voting on it. So, in other words, you don't have to vote on it. You just pass this little Slaughter rule and it will it will say it's like we passed it. Now, I don't know for the life of me how anyone is dumb enough to think the American people aren't going to remember that and how these people are actually going to try to look you in the eye and say, oh, no, no, no, I didn't vote for that. I just voted for the Slaughter rule. No, I didn't vote for healthcare reform. I'm thinking about this and I hear Robert Gibbs and this exchange.

VOICE: Do you believe the Deem and Pass scenario constitutes an up or down vote?

GIBBS: I think that I think that you're going to ask people how they stand on healthcare. You're not going to ask them how they stand on Deem and Pass. You're going to have a vote count that constructs not the process for the rule but where you are on healthcare.

GLENN: Stop, stop, stop. Then why would you do Deem and Pass? Why would you do that? We're going to ask about healthcare, not Deem and Pass. Remember, first they wanted to do it by the the right way. First Barack Obama says, you know, there's no way you can do this with 51 votes because you won't be able to rule like that. You won't be able to rule like that, won't be able to govern like that. So, we can't do it where 51 votes. Well, they couldn't do it with 60. Now they're just trying to do it with 51 votes. They couldn't get 51 votes. So, then they decide, well, we'll just do reconciliation. We'll just we'll just pass it by the House. Well, no, no. Then that wouldn't work. So, then what? So, then they go from reconciliation to Deem and Pass, the Slaughter rule. But before they say that, they say we just want a straight up or down. We just want a straight or or down vote, yes or no. We just thumbs up, thumbs down. They can't get that. Deem and Pass. By hook or by crook, anyway they can and she pushes him on it.

Voice: up or down vote, you would be satisfied with this Deem and Pass bill?

GIBBS: I think that again, I think that again, I think there are many that would want to inflate this process into something that's different than the product.

VOICE: Pelosi said, and I'm quoting, I like it, this scenario, because people don't have to vote on the Senate bill.

GIBBS: I would ask for

VOICE: (Inaudible.)

GIBBS: I would ask one of her capable spokespeople on what she had to say.

VOICE: Okay. Wait all right. But would you say there seems to be some inconsistency between what she says and having an up or down vote?

GIBBS: (Inaudible.)

VOICE: Okay. Then real quickly do you would you agree that it exacerbates the perception that his is a dirty or underhanded process?

GIBBS: No, no. Of course not.

VOICE: And, now, scattered showers of journalism.

GLENN: Well, it was.

PAT: It was.

GLENN: Yeah. It was nice. It was somebody from NBC, too.

PAT: Savannah Guthrie is her name and for him to say, as you just went through the whole process of how they've been trying to get this thing passed and then for them to do this sleazy maneuver and claim that nobody cares about the process, it's just don't even worry about the process. The process isn't important. It's just whether or not we get this thing passed.

GLENN: We played the audio of Chuck Schumer yesterday. Can we play the audio again? Here's Chuck Schumer behind closed doors in a conference on you know, look. There's a lot of things that we can do and not just on this but, you know, sure, we need we need two thirds to be able to pass anything, you know, to change any of the rules in the Constitution but we've got some other ideas. Here he is.

SCHUMER: This is something that people have looked at (inaudible.) So, you can't just rush it out. You have to really study it carefully and that's what the hearing (inaudible) and the rules committee who has jurisdiction over what this is intended to. There have been some very interesting papers written that said that the Constitutional right, for instance, of the Senate to make its own rules supercedes the two thirds that you can't change the rules but only when Congress writes new rules at the beginning of each Congress, every two year period where we reorganize ourselves.

PAT: Wow.

SCHUMER: That's something we want to explore.

PAT: I'll bet. I'll bet.

GLENN: That's, by the way, exclusive audio, taped by the friend of the program. There's exclusive audio for you of we'll play by any rules that we want. Now, here's, here's where I want to go. I want you to listen to this. This is the fundamental transformation of America. This is it. This is it. The reason why this is hook or crook is because they've got to they will do whatever they can, because all of their power is here. It is in this bill. This is it. This is the moment of transformation.

Now, I ask you to do two things. First it you to answer does it make sense that they would pass this in way, shape, or form and they would blame it on the Republicans. They're not bribing the Republicans. I don't know if they know this, but Dennis Kucinich is not a republican. They're bribing the Democrats. There won't be a single republican voting for this bill and if there is, that republican will be voted out of office, guaranteed. So, this is a 100% democratic bill. The benefits don't start in until between 2014 and 2015. Your tax burdens and everything else begin immediately. So, how do they expect to be reelected?

Now, I guess the answer be can be, well, because they think we're stupid and maybe that's it. Maybe that's it. But I think it is more likely that this has so much power and control in it, they're not worried about elections. But if it is this important and it is going to tear this country in half, it is going to destroy healthcare. If it is truly this important and you truly believe in it, put your name on it; but they don't want to do that. Nancy Pelosi likes this idea because that way you don't have to have your name on it. Let me just read portions of the last part of the Declaration of Independence.

In every stage of these oppressions, we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince whose character is, thus, marked by every act which may define a tyrant is unfit to be the ruler of free people. Nor have we been wanting inattentions for our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend the unwarrantable justification of jurisdictions over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our immigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice. We have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow the use of these usurpations. They, too, have been deaf to the voice of justice. We, therefore, must denounce our separation, hold them as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace, friends. We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in general Congress assembled, appealing to the supreme judge of the world, do in the name and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, do solemnly publish and declare that these united colonies are and of right ought to be free and independent.

Now, when they write that it ought to be totally dissolved, that they now have all the power, these men, no different than the members of Congress now except maybe in honor and integrity and spine. They knew when they signed this it was not that they were going to be voted out of office when they signed this after they had done everything they could. When they signed this, they knew it would be a death warrant! We will hang together or we will hang separately, but we will hang. And one by one they put their name on it. John Hancock's signature is the size that he the is because he said he wanted the king to be able to see his name without putting his spectacles on. They knew it was a death warrant and this Congress is so unlike any Congress we have ever had. This Congress is so unlike our founders that they don't even want their name on healthcare! The first Congress, which was no different, it had its bad apples in it, it had its problems, they wrote, and in support of this declaration with firm reliance on the protection of divine providence. What do you think they meant by protection? It wasn't SEIU they were worried about being protected from. It wasn't the unions that they thought would protect them. They were worried about their own life and they knew God would protect them, because they were living and doing moral and just things, out in the open, with their names on it. That's why they could, in the end, in the last line before their names, and in support of this declaration with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.

A video has been making the rounds on social media that appears to show Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) telling Fox News host Sean Hannity and Lara Trump that the FBI search of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home was “not a raid.”

The video, which has been viewed more than 3.5 million times as of this writing, was captioned "Ron DeSantis went on Hannity and things got SPICY." A (very badly) altered video had footage of DeSantis at a 2020 press conference inserted to look like he was correcting Hannity's use of the word "raid" to describe the recent Mar-a-Lago debacle.

“It’s not a raid. With all due respect. It was not a raid. They were serving valid process in accordance with the laws and Constitution of the United States and the state of Florida. They did it with integrity. They did it with honor. And to say it’s a raid is disinformation," DeSantis says in the video, kicking off the alleged "spicy" back and forth.

Both Reuters and AP News have issued fact-checks to debunk the doctored video, because apparently people on Twitter can't decern the extremally, blatantly, painfully obvious alterations for themselves.

Did people really not notice that Hannity is in a weird time loop that makes him appear to be suffering some sort of seizure? Or the way Lara's face is frozen mid-blink? Or how about DeSantis' beyond-even-the-world's-worst-mouth-breather default position when Hannity is speaking? And if none of that clued folks in, surely the crazy chyron would do the trick, right?

Maybe not.

DeSantis' then-press secretary Christina Pushaw (who just resigned from her job as press secretary to work as the rapid response director for the governor's re-election campaign) had to step in to set the record straight.

Gov. DeSantis joined Glenn Beck on the most recent "Glenn Beck Podcast" to talk about the unrelenting leftist and media attacks accusing him of tyranny and scaremongering about how he'll "kill" our "democracy" and to explain why he isn’t slowing down.

DeSantis is unafraid to call out their lies and keep Florida on the front lines for freedom. When Disney tried to protest his Parental Rights in Education law, he stood his ground — and won. He did the same with CRT and woke prosecutors and is now gearing up to take on ESG.

In the video clip below, he details what his state has already done, what the legislature is preparing to do, and why he's calling on other states to join in his anti-ESG battle: "If we pooled our voting rights together, we would be able to counteract what California and New York and a lot of these other pension plans are doing."

Watch the video clip below or find the full episode here. Can't watch? Download the podcast here


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

'Like Hunter Biden without the hookers': Why did Nancy Pelosi's son REALLY join Taiwan trip?

Photo by (Left) Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images (Right) I-Hwa Cheng/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Nearly everyone, from President Joe Biden to the head of the United Nations, agreed that California Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trip to Taiwan was dangerous. Even former President Barack Obama's ambassador to China, Max Baucus, said Pelosi's actions made Biden look even weaker than he already does — and that's really saying something.

So, why did Pelosi risk global war and go against her own party? If you listen to Politco, she's got a "decades-long" beef with China and just wanted to show support for the Asian nation, but the timing of her trip suggests there’s likely more to the story.

On "Glenn TV," Glenn Beck exposed the Pelosi family's (including her son) lucrative connections to Taiwanese companies and revealed how certain business deals directly related to their trip to Taiwan.

"Nancy Pelosi and her husband and their son ... they love money as a family. By the way, did you know her son went on that trip and was doing business with, oh, wow, some of the people she was meeting with? Did you know that?" Glenn asked. "Sounds a little like Hunter Biden without the hookers and the crack."

Glenn pointed out that when Pelosi was elected to Congress, "somewhere in the late 1700s," her net worth was about $3 million, but by 2008 her family's wealth had ballooned to $31 million. By the end of the Obama term, her wealth had doubled to $61 million, and just two years later it shot up to $114 million.

"Wow! That is not bad beans for a meager public servant. They [Pelosi and her husband] must be master investors and it just took getting elected to public office to truly unlock that secret," Glenn quipped. "Or they were privy to some sort of information that the rest of us don't have access to, kinda like the sale of $5 million in computer chip stock before Congress voted on a recent semiconductor bill," he continued.

"But, surely, Taiwan has nothing to do with their own little private cash machine, right? ... I'm sure it had nothing to do with her husband's stock trading of companies that make computer chips. And it has nothing to do with, at the same time, Nancy is working on a semiconductor bill. It surely has nothing to do with the fact that the largest semiconductor manufacturer, TSMC, is right there in Taiwan, right? I mean, surely, with all of this heat, Nancy Pelosi would be smart enough not to be seen anywhere near Taiwan's semiconductor manufacturers," Glenn said.

"I'm not saying this might double the Pelosis' millions again, but I'm not not saying that either, you know?" he added.



On the radio program, Glenn continued to break down the hushed business deals between the Pelosi family and Taiwanese companies and revealed how it all directly relates to their not-at-all suspicious trip to the Asian nation.

Watch the video clip below to hear more from "The Glenn Beck Program." Can't watch? Download the podcast here.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

This MUST be why Trump (allegedly) had NUCLEAR documents at Mar-a-Lago

Photo by (Left) Win McNamee/ (Right) Bettmann /Contributor/Getty Images

According to the Washington Post's "anonymous sources," the FBI was looking for documents related to nuclear weapons during its raid of Mar-a-Lago.

Who could have guessed what Donald Trump did with those documents (never mind that he allegedly had them for over a year before the FBI actually did anything)? And who knows why they were searching through Melania's drawers for such top-secret information? Also, isn't it interesting that even after both Attorney General Merrick Garland and Donald Trump asked for the search warrant to be unsealed, only this very unspecific and very damning bit of information was "leaked" to the Washington Post? And just a few months before the midterm elections?

Since the DOJ still hasn't told us much (what was leaked to the media), Glenn did his best to present a few "theories" of his own on "The Glenn Beck Program" Friday. Watch the video clip below to hear more from "The Glenn Beck Program." Can't watch? Download the podcast here.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

New details emerge about Trump raid — and 'it doesn't look good for the FBI'

Photo by Eva Marie Uzcategui/Getty Images

New, alleged details about the raid of former President Donald Trump's home at Mar-a-Lago hint that it's "not looking good for the FBI," said BlazeTV host Glenn Beck on the radio program Thursday.

Trump has faced attacks from every direction, but despite all of it, he has "not been found guilty or had any kind of real, solid evidence against him," Glenn pointed out.

Glenn detailed a long list of investigations, accusations, and lawsuits against Trump, and the latest puzzling revelations about the FBI's raid of Mar-a-Lago, which only seem to raise even more questions. For example, did agents truly refuse to give Trump's lawyer a copy of the warrant upon arriving at the home? Because sources have alleged that his attorney was kept "10 feet away from the warrant" and was not allowed to actually read it. If that's true, then it was absolutely against the law.

Then there was the inordinate amount of time spent going through Melania Trump's closet. And did they have the proper authority to break into Trump's safe?

"That warrant had better damn well say that they can break into that safe because the law is, you can't go into somebody's house and ... just tear it all apart," Glenn said. "You have to have a pretty good idea of where things might be located, and you ask for permission for those areas. And you have to know exactly what you're looking for, and if it's in a safe, you need to specifically say, 'it's in a safe and we're having a safe cracker come in.' If they didn't say in the warrant that they could crack his safe, it's the fruit of the poisoned tree. By the way, there was nothing in the safe."

Glenn also explained that the FBI broke into a specific "safe room" that contained national archives, which Trump was allegedly told by investigators to keep in a locked room.

"[Trump] made a safe room, and put two locks on it, at their request. And that's what they broke into," Glenn said. "This doesn't look good for the FBI," he added.

Watch the video clip below to hear more from "The Glenn Beck Program." Can't watch? Download the podcast here.


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.